Wednesday, June 25, 2025

After bizarre end to promising campaign, Israel will face Iran nuclear question again


After bizarre end to promising campaign, Israel will face Iran nuclear question again


On Sunday, Israel — and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — were on top of the world.

For the first time, the US had actively taken part in offensive operations in support of an Israeli military campaign.

Israel was emerging as the undisputed power in the region, with the US as the patron that Middle Eastern rulers would hurry to placate. Next on Israel’s agenda, now that the US was hammering Iran, was the pivot back to normalization efforts with Arab states, including Saudi Arabia.

After US bombs struck Iran’s three key nuclear sites, US President Donald Trump heaped praise on Netanyahu and the IDF: “I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we’ve gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel. I want to thank the Israeli military for the wonderful job they’ve done.”

Iran, it seemed, was in a corner. It could accept Trump’s demands and give up the nuclear program it has called its national right, showing profound weakness that could also encourage opponents of the regime to make their move. Or it could continue to defy and threaten Trump, inviting expanded strikes, which could start to destabilize the regime.

Then, on Monday evening, it appeared that Tehran had signed its own death warrant. With Trump seemingly still on a high after witnessing his military punish an adversary that had defied his demands for months, Iran fired missiles at a US base in Qatar.

To make matters worse, Iran boasted about its “mighty and successful response” to “America’s aggression.”

The ayatollahs, it seemed, were about to face the wrath of Donald Trump, a man who famously does not like to be defied.

A furious president

When he congratulated both countries in his ceasefire statement for their “Stamina, Courage, and Intelligence,” it was hard to tell that one side was America’s closest ally in the Middle East, and the other a sworn enemy.

Events moved in an even more bizarre direction after the ceasefire ostensibly went into effect.

It started with the final attacks by both sides before the truce came into force.

In the early morning hours, well before Trump’s declared 7 a.m. start to the ceasefire, Israeli Air Force fighter jets hit dozens of Iranian military targets in Tehran.

In response, Iran fired some 20 ballistic missiles in six salvos, killing four people in Beersheba and leaving 22 more injured.

Iran fired again at 10:30 a.m. local time, well into the ceasefire. And Israeli leaders promised a forceful response to that blatant violation.

With Israeli jets in the air, Trump stepped in front of the microphones on the White House lawn at 7 a.m. Washington time.

Early assessment

Perhaps it was to be expected. Israel’s position post-war is strongest when it defeats its adversaries on its own, as it did in 1967. When it finds itself leaning on the US for support, as it did in the 1973 Yom Kippur War with the crucial American resupply airlift, it has to bow to Washington’s demands on how the wars end and what comes next.

Despite the awkward end to the operation, Israel accomplished much in its air campaign.

It significantly set back both the nuclear and ballistic programs. Iran’s top nuclear scientists are dead, and its three main sites are badly damaged at worst, and perhaps totally destroyed.

Israel also settled the account with Iran that had been open since October 7, 2023, when its Gaza-governing proxy Hamas invaded and massacred some 1,200 people in southern Israel and abducted 251 hostages.

More...


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The first sign of trouble - POTUS requested China stop Iran from blocking Hormuz, the petroleum Achilles Heel of western civilization. Result - magnifying Chinese influence on Middle East policies and weakening American resolve in the fear of higher fuel prices, economic dislocations and a seed change in the political map.